After 77 Years, Cabaret Laws Face Rewrite

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER

Published: June 24, 2003

The Bloomberg administration is poised to rewrite the city's nearly 80-year-old cabaret laws, which regulate all bars and restaurants where revelers dance. The laws, which were used by the Giuliani administration to punish nightclubs and bars where under-age drinking, drug dealing and other crimes were prevalent, have been a source of controversy for years.

But there is dissent within the Bloomberg administration about how to change the law. Some in the administration favor a more broad-based license that would be required for all establishments that are open into the early morning hours. Other officials fear such a license would further alienate nightclub and restaurant owners, who have already been hit with an indoor smoking ban and sidewalk cafe legislation this year, a view that is shared by some club owners and nightlife enthusiasts.

''We have been told that they won't regulate dancing anymore,'' said Adam Shore, a co-founder of Legalize Dancing NYC, a group that has been lobbying to eliminate the cabaret laws. But he said he worries that the city will replace the laws with other regulations that also will hurt the nightlife industry.

A public hearing will be held today in Lower Manhattan, where elected officials, nightclub and restaurants owners, and other experts are expected to testify and offer proposed changes to the law.

It is illegal under current law to operate a cabaret in New York City without a two-year license, which costs $600 to $1,000, based on capacity. Those places that hold a license are closely monitored by various city agencies. Only 332 establishments have the license.

There seems to be a general agreement that the law, which was promulgated in 1926, needs to go.

''We don't think the city's existing cabaret laws adequately address the problems affecting communities and nightlife establishments,'' said Gretchen Dykstra, the commissioner of the Department of Consumer Affairs, ''but we need to document the range of the problem.''

Many bar and restaurants owners have argued that the law is archaic and too punitive, in part because it has resulted in the closing of neighborhood bars without cabaret licenses where patrons have been caught dancing around a jukebox.

Many nightclub owners, tourists and night life enthusiasts have wondered why New York City needs a law for dancing at all, and some have complained that the city uses the law as a tool to shut down clubs.

Community groups and others have argued that while the laws may need changing, the city must maintain some form of regulatory system. Some of those groups fear the proliferation of loud bars and restaurants that disturb neighboring residents. As it stands, one requirement for getting a cabaret license is that a bar or restaurant be in an area zoned for such establishments.

Some community groups say that dancing is not the problem and that the state should get tougher with places that violate the law by removing their liquor licenses.

''Patrons dancing in and of itself is not what is bothering people,'' said Anthony Borrelli, the district manager of Community Board 4 in Manhattan. ''We are primarily concerned with minimizing disturbances outside nightlife establishments. Enforcement is a big issue for us. If new laws are created that will make enforcement easier, that has potential.''

The laws have also pit establishments that go through the effort, expense and scrutiny that getting a license entails against those bars and restaurants that do not seek a license and permit dancing anyway.

So far this year, the city has padlocked 11 places that featured dancing without a license; between 1999 and 2003, the city closed 20. The Giuliani administration tended to remove or threaten places that held licenses as punishment for a range of violations, from inadequate exits to drug use by patrons.

Ms. Dykstra has told colleagues she is most intrigued with the idea of a new license that would apply to a broad base of nightlife places -- such as those open after a certain hour.

But some officials say that even if such a law makes it easier for some businesses to offer dancing and live performances, a new regulation could also backfire against the administration, which has taken heat for its tough anti-smoking regulations and for raising a variety of fees around the city to help balance the budget. ''I don't know in this economic environment that we need yet another regulation,'' one city official said. ''I don't want to do anything that could be viewed as another impediment to business.''

The New York Nightlife Association maintains that, even without the cabaret laws, dance clubs will still be regulated and limited by the zoning laws, building and fire codes, and the Health Department. ''Our concern is not so much the eradication of a cabaret law as we are with a vast expansion of regulatory power by the Department of Consumer Affairs,'' said David Rabin, president of the association. ''Nightlife as we see is suffering left and right.''

Some club owners are concerned that restaurants that have not had dancing in the past might not have the type of safety systems that many night clubs have.

Ms. Dykstra, who said in an interview that regulating clubs by their hours of operation was ''interesting,'' also insisted that the administration wanted to hear ideas from a plethora of parties before drawing any conclusions. ''I am keenly aware that we don't want to over-regulate,'' she said. ''We have to think of it as a matrix: where is the overlap between hours and location and is there anyway we can draw conclusion?''

The Bloomberg administration could put together a bill sometime this year, and submit it to the City Council, which will inevitably hold its own series of hearings before settling on any changes to the law.